So I'm taking a History 1302 class at school, and my teacher is really cool. As part of the curriculum he posts questions on a campus message board. The first three we answer are mandatory, after that we can voluntarily answer up to three more. Each one we answer gives us an extra point on our final grade. Here is the last question I participated in:

"If you could choose one person from American History from 1877 to the present to have as a dinner guest (other than me), who would you choose and why? Each student must choose a different person. The person must be someone in American History.

Please make life easy for me by putting the name of the person you would have dinner with the subject line. If you choose someone that has already by chosen, I will delete your post and you will recieve no credit for it.

Sean"

My response:

(Subject line:) Anton LaVey

Bet you weren't expecting that one! I'd pick Anton LaVey as a dinner guest because I've always been fascinated with intelligent iconoclasts. G.B. Shaw, Ambrose Bierce, and Dr. Cecil Nixon are also close matches, but LaVey wins out because of his infamy and acceptance of his vilification. His life was fascinating, having done work as a lion tamer and calliope player for the circus, crime scene photographer for the San Fran PD, psychic investigator, and finally creator of the Church of Satan (of course some will point to the Rolling Stone article which claimed LaVey did very few of these things, but oddly enough that article never actually offered any proof of it's claims, unlike LaVey).

Having many similar interests including sideshows, music of the 1910's -1940's, the grimy side of life, the occult, old horror films, art deco, guns, "Total environments," etc, I'm sure we'd have plenty to discuss. I imagine we'd have a few (or several) drinks and talk until the sun rose. I once had the good fortune to spend about four hours talking to one of his friends (artist Timothy Patrick Butler) and it was one of the best conversations I've ever had. We talked about nearly everything under the sun and the only reason we stopped is because he was in the middle of his work and I didn't want to keep him too long. Love him or hate him, a dinner with LaVey would be unforgettable.

------------------------

Unusually, he actually added a follow-up to mine, which is the first time I've ever actually seen him post a response to anyone's answer:

"Great response!...again keep in mind that 1910's= the year 1910; 1910s refers to the decade. I read his work before..certainly would match a libertarian point of view"

Sometimes you take a gamble and win!

Edited by London (10/01/1108:36 AM)

_________________________
If the enemy of my enemy is my friend, then using logic I can deduce that the friend of my friend is my enemy.

G.B. Shaw, Ambrose Bierce, and Dr. Cecil Nixon are also close matches, but LaVey wins out because of his infamy and acceptance of his vilification.

Again, well said. Racking up those extra points by doing what one enjoys is a bonus!

HS!

_________________________
�Love is one of the most intense feelings felt by man; another is hate. Forcing yourself to feel indiscriminate love is very unnatural. If you try to love everyone you only lessen your feelings for those who deserve your love. Repressed hatred can lead to many physical and emotional aliments. By learning to release your hatred towards those who deserve it, you cleanse yourself of these malignant emotions and need not take your pent-up hatred out on your loved ones.� Anton Szandor LaVey, The Satanic Bible

Q) Should Satanists engage the issue of LHP fragmentation by pushing for some sort of Satanic unity...

The answer is "no".

There is already "unity" in the sense that those who are born Satanists are inherently "unified" already in their fundamental alignment with Satanism.

There will never be "unity" among Satanists in any other sense, as Satanism is a philosophy of radical individualism, and "unity" beyond what I've described above, being contrary to the core perspective of Satanism, is neither desirable or even possible.

Non-issue, essentially.

We don't give a shit what non-Satanists do as long as they leave us alone.

Hell, I don't even give a shit what other Satanists do, as long as they leave me alone.

In short, your question is based on a false premise, born out of a misconception about core Satanic dogma.

This has been asked and answered before, is not that strange a question to someone fairly new to Satanic thought and testing the reactions of Satanists to various ideas, and I'm sure further study can prevent such queries in the future.